log keys wikipedia"I may piss off Qualcomm." These notes are from one of the world's top wireless researchers. I asked for help understanding the battle over telcos taking a large chunk of Wi-Fi spectrum. He's a good guy. If I pressed, he would probably go public. 

Instead, I decided to write the article without his name after three other researchers also refused to go on-the-record. This is the power of companies worth $300B when they go all out. Several very good engineers have spoken out, including a Stanford prof. I could have gone to them but instead sought out experts I haven't seen publicly discussing the subject. If any reader with wireless expertise can help me out, on or off the record, I'd welcome it. In particular, if you think -72 dBm testing will eliminate most interference, please let me know. 

His first comment was, "I would lean towards a -87 to -90 dBm threshold as being the appropriate level to avoid wifi interference to a significant number of wifi users."

A little later, he followed with, "I would believe linkNYC'a reports, and this is an important development for the future of NY and other cities - see today's NYT article about the poor needing access to free internet in NY."

A few hours later, he had sent a note, "You better run this by me before you print. I may piss off Qualcomm."

You don't need a degree in EE to understand what the problem is. Verizon/Qualcomm hasn't even tested whether LTE-U interferes in real world deployments like LinkNYC. Instead, they insist on tests against non-conforming Wi-Fi gear, some of which is made by Qualcomm-Atheros. Some of their engineers carefully say, "does not interfere more than current Wi-Fi," hoping no one will notice that leaves a great deal of interference. In addition, this would be a standard for the future - obsolete WI-Fi results don't matter.
Can anyone guess how many $billions Qualcomm expects for licensing?
 

5GW News

dave rightStarting July 2017, all new articles are at wirelessone.news. The pols and the marketing folks have made "5G" a meaningless term so the name doesn't fit reporting on advanced wireless. This will stay so old links work. I've reported broadband since 1999 and now is the time for gigabit wireless. Catch a mistake or have news? Email me please. Dave Burstein